<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (10) TMI 1131 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187312</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty imposed under Sec. 158BFA for undisclosed income during the Block Period was unjustified. The assessing officer failed to provide conclusive evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars by the assessee, leading to the deletion of the penalty. The Tribunal emphasized the need for concrete evidence before levying penalties under such provisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:02:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445130" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 1131 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187312</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty imposed under Sec. 158BFA for undisclosed income during the Block Period was unjustified. The assessing officer failed to provide conclusive evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars by the assessee, leading to the deletion of the penalty. The Tribunal emphasized the need for concrete evidence before levying penalties under such provisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187312</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>